I found a post on another board of the following image

http://near.jhuapl.edu/iod//20000503/index.html



What strikes me is the bright rectangular boulder which the website descibes as

I was just wondering, since it stands out quite, if it is photographical noise of some kind, or do boulders sometimes have such rectangular shapes?

Let me be the first to say...

Notice the hyperdimensional relationship it has to that big crater. Being at exactly 19.5 degrees....


Erm Nevermind....

Image compression artifact?

__________________
GCS/S d(+) s+:+ a--- C++(+++)>$ W+++>$ L>+ M+>++ w++ P+>++ tv@ PS b+ DI+ G e-> h! r-- !z+

~Jorge Schrauwen

Fascinating anomaly, fascinating. It proves conclusively that the extraterrestrial are having this here Solar system bugged all over. :-$

You disagree [-( - awright, you prove me wrAAAAAAAAAAAARGH

[Is being sucked into a hyperimensional hole that is being opened by Skeptica, a benevolent deity protecting science from her enemies]



On a more serious note: Any idea how the rectangularity might be caused (blind luck, jpg compression, lack of resolution)?

__________________
Non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem.

points to preveus post,

seems like compression to me or just missing data

it happens some time when transmitting.

__________________
GCS/S d(+) s+:+ a--- C++(+++)>$ W+++>$ L>+ M+>++ w++ P+>++ tv@ PS b+ DI+ G e-> h! r-- !z+

~Jorge Schrauwen

I also think it's a compression artifact.

That, or the Arthur C Clarke's monolith.

Well, I brought it into photoshop, and enlarged it, then ran successive sharpen filters on it, and you can clearly see windows, and little green people walking around

Would a compression artifact cast a shadow like that?

__________________
Home of the Illumi-Llama:
The Illuminati-R-Us Forums

Dang you Kemal, you stole my joke!

__________________
here we go, the world is spinning
when it stops, it's just beginning

sun comes up, we laugh and we cry
sun goes down, and then we all die

Touched by his noodly appendage

to mee it looks like the shadow is comming from the crater wall, not from the object.

__________________
GCS/S d(+) s+:+ a--- C++(+++)>$ W+++>$ L>+ M+>++ w++ P+>++ tv@ PS b+ DI+ G e-> h! r-- !z+

~Jorge Schrauwen

All,
Yet another 'inexplicable' object/marking! It can't be a compression artefact as it casts a shadow, and if the shadow comes from the crater wall, what is the highlight from? The shadow is intriguing - can anyone reconstruct the object's outline from it? Looks like a square block, with a lower rectagular one towards the picture bottom. BUt bthe square block has protrusions.

Compare for 'inexplicability' the straight lines on Cassini and Dione (Travis' Fissure) discussued in previous threads:
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...fissure#410882
and
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...re&start=0

The 'Face on Mars' resolved into perfectly normal geology (arsology?) with better definition. I suppose these will do the same eventutally.

John

Areology (from the Greek name, Ares)

[tongue in cheek]

And I insist that this structure can a 100 % sure never be anything else but an artifact, but I see you are a paid government shill who has come here to disinform us all about the "non"existence of aliens who are having our entire Solar system bugged to help the Masons carry out their hellish [goes on ranting like this for half an hour]. Or as they like to say in their posts: You are a hundred percent totally wrong!

[/tongue in cheek]

__________________
Non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem.

just colord the white things gray, changed nothing else

__________________
GCS/S d(+) s+:+ a--- C++(+++)>$ W+++>$ L>+ M+>++ w++ P+>++ tv@ PS b+ DI+ G e-> h! r-- !z+

~Jorge Schrauwen

I wonder if I can get that thing nammed after me permanently?
Kinda neat, poking around, and finding your references of "Travis' Fissure" I quit following that thread soon after I posted it, and am quite impressed at the length of it (actually, this post should be there...)

Anyway... regarding the image in question:

Why can't it just be a fractured boulder with a "rectangular" facet?

__________________

Feynman
>~~~~<
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.

Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.

It doesn't resemble a JPEG compression artifact, however its near alignment with the vertical lends suspicion to pixel bleed or blowout. It might be a relatively bright object, but the shadow indicates a dome-or hemisphere shaped protrusion. Even if the hilight is correct, the shadow serves to provide a domelike profile, nothing particularly unusual, which leads to a conclusion of a fractured stony boulder, with few other straight line features.

All,
Areology, my *rs*.

But prepare to goggle, fellow far-outers. Look at the original pic and Jorges version. Top left are four much smaller columnar objects that cast shadows.
THEY ARE ALL ON THE PERIMETER OF A CIRCLE.

What more proof do you need? What of? The answer is obvious.

_______________________________________
Reality check

Actually, the arrangement must be fairly unlikely, as three points define an unique circle. For a fourth to land on the perimeter by chance must be low odds - but we can't see the rest of the circle and there are lots of other, similar but smaller objects all over the pic. Some of them might be small craters, below the resolution of the pic, so that they lose their true shape.
BUT, if the original Patrick's Object is 45ft high then the circle objects must be 10-12ft high. They aren't small craters, surely. How can rocks that big land so lightly that they just sit on the surface? Let alone P'sO? Are they extrusions of some kind?

Travis, of course you should be able to claim your find. But the International Astronomical Union has already declared how features of all these planets and planetoids shall be named (I got this from the Wikipaedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planeta...nclature#Dione

Dione
People and places from Virgil's Aeneid

Rhea
People and places from creation myths

And Eros:"Craters - Mythological and legendary names of an erotic nature."

WOW! Russ Meyer, thou shoulds't be living at this hour.

John

I agree with Patkelly that this thing is not actually rectangular. If you blow up the image by a factor of five, you can easily see that it is peppered with -many- small features which appear rectangular and aligned vertically, just like the white object. The rectangularity of all of these small features is surely a compression artifact. The problem is so bad that even some of the small craters appear to have straight sides.

Still an interesting feature. Even if it is just a big rock, I imagine it would be pretty impressive when seen from the ground.

while i edited the block in my image, in close zoom it loked more like a small bump in the center of the crater the shadow also looks like it is from a simi-spherical elevation

__________________
GCS/S d(+) s+:+ a--- C++(+++)>$ W+++>$ L>+ M+>++ w++ P+>++ tv@ PS b+ DI+ G e-> h! r-- !z+

~Jorge Schrauwen

Hmmm... I think they used the wording "rectangular" not in the meaning that the object is rectangular, i think it would be more likely that they are refering to its look in the picture(In fact the object is not even in the upper right corner)

Its easily noticable due to its high contrast with the surrounding, it is, how ever, comperable in brightness to the other high lighted patches. If I was to make a guess about why it is so, I would say that the crater is relatively shallow, with a higher edge in the upper left(towards the sun) so that the crater is shadowed, while the object is high enough to get good light, also note that the part of the crater the object is in is partialy lighted, so it wouldnt have to be very high. It is probably more dome/cone like then rectangular. Hard to say how high it is though.

__________________
Game over, you lose, we hope you enjoyed playing the exciting game of Thermodynamics...

In the original picture, the 'rectangle' doesn't seem to cover the entire top of whatever-it-is that's sticking up and making the shadow...in Jorge's 'colorized' version, the raggedy top of the whatever-it-is seems to lend itself to the oddball shape of the shadow.

I'm somewhat inclined to call the 'rectangle' an optical artifact due to a bright reflection, resulting in...what do you call it? A blown pixel?

__________________
"If a tree is cut down in the rainforest, and is used to make paper to print a book, and the book is really bad, and there's nobody that will read it, do you still hear a sucking sound?"
Charlie in Dayton, A.AsC.